Skip to main content

About your Search

20131202
20131210
Search Results 0 to 4 of about 5 (some duplicates have been removed)
that you are pointing to says, what we need to do is andte growth in the economy growth in the economy will take care of all of the a prop -- all of the problems that stand is worried about. it will not take care of all the problems i'm talking about. i am very sympathetic to what larry is saying, who i consider a friend. he -- to get too number numbery. 40 years ago, this is an argument very would be sympathetic to. 40 years ago we spent 42% on government investment. that would include things like infrastructure, education, r&d. we spent about 30% on transfer payments to the elderly. we now spend 68% on transfer payments but investments are down to 15%. so, i think to larry's point, what did we get out of the investment? we got the internet, gps, the human genome. >> that is where you agree? >> i totally agree. if you look at the sequester -- >> investments are worthwhile and crucial to our future. >> yes, but we are cutting the investment so we can continue to let transfer payments to the elderly grow at a rapid rate. we cannot do both. >> or we are cutting the investments because we
in the economy and the growth in the economy will take care of all the problems that stan is worried about. >> okay, so, a, it won't take care of all the problems i'm talking about. b, i'm very sympathetic -- >> rose: i'm simplifying that a little bit. >> i'm sympathetic to what larry is saying, who i consider a friend. i hate to get too number-y here, stock? so 40 years ago -- and this is an argument larry would be very sympathetic to. 40 years ago we spent 32% of federal outlays on investment, government investment. that would include things like infrastructure, education, r&d. >> rose: science exploration. >> rose: and we spent about 30% on transfer payments to the elderly. >> we now spend 68% on transfer payments but investments are down to 15%. so i think to larry's point, what did we get out of the investment? well, we got the internet. we got g.p.s., we got the human genome. >> rose: so that's where you agree with him. >> i totally agree. and if you look at the sequester -- >> rose: that the investments are worthwhile and important and crucial to our future. >> yes, but we are cutti
on over 4300 stocks. learn more at the street.com/nbr. >>> growing stronger, the u.s. economy grows at its fastest pace since early 2012, but is the 3.6% rate as strong as it appears? and why do american businesses still seem so hesitant? >> protests over pay. fast food workers strike in the biggest push yet for higher wages. they want $15 an hour. they average around $9 now. what a big raise would mean for
Search Results 0 to 4 of about 5 (some duplicates have been removed)